Procursus:

The Manifesto de Raŭmo in 1996 was widely interpreted as giving up on the idea of Esperanto as a universal auxiliary language —English is doing that job, however badly— in favor of simply enjoying it in a hobbyist way, as one might enjoy opera or literature or soccer or long walks on the beach. Other Raumists read it as considering Esperanto as a minority language community, and riding on the coattails of growing sentiments and legislation relating to minority community rights. (In fact, these were somewhat unfair stereotypes of what Raumism was all about, but they were widespread.)

Earlier views were hardly extinct. Esperanto’s value as a universal auxiliary language would be great, even though it was still unrealized, and was still worth arguing for. But in addition (or perhaps better, meanwhile) a number of strong arguments could be supported for the value of Esperanto quite aside from hobbyist considerations or dubious claims of being a persecuted minority.

At a Universal Congress in Prague in 1996 a resolution was therefore developed that can be seen as a reassertion of the view that the world should pay attention to Esperanto. But its arguments are updated to focus more strongly on issues of the present age. While not dismissing the early arguments that people without a common language have trouble understanding each other, the updated list stresses

• Esperanto provides insight into language in general and serves as a propaedeutic in the study of other languages.
• Esperanto study and use as conducive to a sense of egalitarian global citizenship.
• the basic unfairness of a linguistic régime in which some people participate using their mother tongue while others have to study for years to participate, and are implicitly urged to abandon own linguistic heritage.

  (It is perhaps significant that little attention is paid here to Esperanto literature. Too Raumist, perhaps.)

  
  —DKJ, March, 2026